Political and Other Comments

Thursday, July 28, 2016

CAPITALISM IS THE GOLDEN EGG

The Democrats are killing the goose that laid the golden egg of capitalism. Capitalism, not socialism, has brought unprecedented prosperity to the world. The Democratic Party needs to kill it to continue on its mad desire for power, socialist power over you and me. The big kill is the absolute control of the U. S. economy, society and political system by the Democrats. The golden egg is broken by their need to control everything and everyone. Central control has never worked, does not work now (China and Venezuela being recent examples), and can never work unless all human beings sacrifice their individual needs and desires for those of everyone else. (Yes, sounds like the Democrat National Committee's platform. It neglects the fact that human beings are...human beings). No matter the LSD, Percoset, weed (Clinton) and (in Obama's case) cocaine, human beings will act as human beings. You who obey the Democrats' "change the world" "make a difference" (for them) and "live your lives for others," never forget that the Clintons, Obamas, Pocohontases, Castros and the rest are the "others" for whom you live your lives, suckers! You are stressed out, relatively poor working for rich "non-profits," owe for government-student loans (the Dems are the Company Town for which you toil), live paycheck to paycheck, and simply not happy. Try now to be an individual, do things that make YOU happy -- used to be called the American Dream and the Pursuit of Happiness until the Progressive Democrats took control. Get it back. Do not vote for any Democrats.

Wednesday, July 27, 2016

The major L E G A C Y of the President of the Democrats major will be in leading the pell mell unmanaged expansion of the federal government and its control over America and Americans. Continuing what he thinks are America's values when they are nothing more than his "values" which are not values at all with any anchor of reality, but the few policies he could ram through Congress when he owned it, Obamacare being about it. The rest have mostly been lawless executive orders, unlawful and unconstitutional rules and regulations mandated by his agencies and bureaus with typically 2 (Democrat) to 1 (Republican) votes, if they even were needed and taken. He absolutely rejected the American division of political power and bypassed Congress as being lazy, and blocking of his progress as needed immediately to make America great again. Or something like that.

His greatest lawlessness was not in not enforcing the Defense of Marriage Act, the laws on illegal drugs and immigration or other laws passed by Congress and signed into law by whoever was then president (some white man). NO! It will be by releasing Hillary Clinton from being held accountable under the law as other Americans are. He needed her to be president only to spin his abject failure of eight years into a L E G A C Y. Eight more years of incompetence, inexperience and ideological/political-only decision-making may well leave the USA in near-insolvency, uncompetitive, growthless, with oppressive central control over all life, society, economy and politics, by the Progressive Socialist Democratic Party and its elites looking out for only themselves. THAT will be his historical legacy (if the United States even exists then to write history) over the decades: failure. The popularity of killing fetuses, homosexuality, "equality," and "diversity" will be looked at as strange, weird and the downfall of the greatest experiment in politics in world history. The Deline and Fall of the United States of America. THAT will be the legacy of Obama and Hillary Clinton.

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Ho Hum a new mass murder record for another crazy Christian or Muslim or Atheist to beat. Forty-nine? "I can better that," some crazy person is thinking as he is reading and hearing the media extravaganza going on for a week. Orlando. He's thirsting at how that girl who rejected him in third grade, or the teacher made fun of him because he was quiet and got bullied, or the popular quarterback; they would now know who he was and how he set a new record. Or maybe he thinks how a belief in Allah might put him in heaven with a bunch of pretty girls wanting him, wanting him. Wow, that's cool.

I have no clue why these monsters kill, maybe they don't either, But they do it and the world celebrates in solidarity (of what? Being caring, or, more likely being popular.) Almost none of the celebrators knew anything about any of the dead or the grieving, and, of course this is not about the dead, it is about "me," the pundents, politicians, Democrats, trying to be popular. "How wondrously caring I am, how sad I am for 50 people randomly dead." They think to themselves, proudly.

True, all of us all will be dead, but when I die the world will not celebrate. Unless. Unless I beat that Muslim's record of 49!

Five hundred mostly black kids will be shot to death in Chicago this year. That should be a record for Obama's hood. He "organized" there which was about all he's ever done. And according to sources, he failed even at doing that. But 500 dead there this year should be celebrated as a local record.

The America of the Democratic Party in power rewards failure as success, success as failure. Think about that. It tries to boost the losers, train the untrainable and bestow degrees on everyone who "tries" (or parties) on the government's money. Diversity counts, not intelligence, not achievement, not effort, not benefitting anyone, just being black wins as clearly elucidated by President Obama,

Unions pay for Democrats to be elected. Democrats give back taxpayer money and power to union bosses. Workers get little, poor and minority kids get less, their education sucks but dealing drugs makes bank (and bullets). This is Obama's world where it is all made-up fantasy, not "where the world is, as it is," as Obama's role model Saul Alinsky wrote. Obama can't even get Alinsky right!

And we Americans are not safe; he has failed at his premier job according to the Constitution.

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

In “Hard Truths About Race On Campus” (Wall Street Journal, Review, May 7 – 8,
2016) Professors Haidt and Jussim seem to miss some observations that might be
additive to their arguments. When I was starting out in business in San
Francisco, activism began on college campuses with the seed being the Vietnam
War. That new Left wanted to bring down those in power (conservative
Republicans). It started out as irresponsible fun (sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll)
but they were taken seriously. Many college administrators gave in to their
demands, and human nature being what it is, if your demands are fulfilled, you
demand more. And more. The greater Progressive Left figured out that giving the
kids what they demanded would buy allegiance and votes. And it has worked:
today, a large majority of university administrators, instructors and students
are Democrats. A vast voting bloc of something around 21 million college
attendees in the 4725-some institutions of higher education. One strategy of
the Left to gain and retain power has always been the collectivization of
individuals (making them easier to herd) through a divide and conquer strategy.
It segments groups by, say, skin color -- "race" -- sexual choices,
gender, net worth, and so on. It figures out how to get their votes, executes
and puts each group in the shopping bag labeled, Progressive Democrat voter.
Race is one of the groups. At the same time, the Left wants more and more
students (voters), and the way is to make it easier to get in to college. But
to get them in, standards need to be lowered (“affirmative action”) and classes
and grading need to be easier to keep the students happy. That means continuing
to give in to student demands. But as always the strident activist students
seem to speak for all the students (the collective). And also as usual, the
media loves the activists for the readers and viewers they attract. Summing up,
the policies of the left include affirmative action, easy majors (yes,
diversity, gender, ethnic and cultural studies, that which we used to call
"underwater basket weaving.) And easy grading.

Now consider that today the
federal government, through a variety of schemes (including President Obama's
takeover of the student loan industry) is the prime financing entity for higher
education. Remember that the Golden Rule No. 1 is, "Who has the gold makes
the rules." So the federal government, makes the rules and the
college presidents obey, knowing that without the gold they would have no
institution. What is the goal of the Obama Democrats running the educational
show? Power, gaining and retaining power through votes. Whatever student
activists want, the financier, the federal government, and the administrators
give in. It all comes together for the benefit of the Democratic Party at the
expense of the nation.

The Left does not want any
assessment of its goals. For example, the oppression against climate
change "deniers" is not about global warming, but about the danger of
the scientific method itself, measuring and assessing the Left's various
narratives. The authors write: "such reforms [of affirmative action and
diversity training] will fail to…reduce discrimination and inequality."
And "make life more uncomfortable for everyone, particularly black students."
That seems to be a goal of the Left; if it was all comfortable and everyone got
along, the power of the Left would be marginalized.

Finally, please consider the
actual words and phrases the professors used: marginalized, racial gaps,
welcoming, inclusive culture, sense of ethnic victimization, feel denigrated or
insulted, microaggression, and so on. Each word or concept is absolutely
subjective, undefinable. They are not only impossible to measure, but each is an individual emotion particular to each student. They cannot be
collectivized. One kid's "microaggression" is different from
another's and, in fact, generally not anything the the microaggressor
wanted to express. But the loudest squeak gets oiled. So colleges must cater
to the most effective advocate or most highly-publicized activist.

The authors finish with: “The
time may be right for a bold college president to propose a different approach,
one based on the available evidence about what works and what doesn’t. That
would be the best way to create a university community in which everyone feels
welcome.” But that could easily risk financial support from the federal
government as well as the student hordes calling for the resignation of the
“bold college president.” There does not seem to be any solution.

And speaking of Golden Rule No. 1, President Obama threatened to withhold ALL of the over-$110,000,000,000 from all schools from kindergarten through high school UNLESS each obeyed his Education Department's dictate to force all kids to toilet, change, shower and join athletic teams of the "opposite" sex IF the student "identifies" as being a member of that opposite sex, with no backing proof or, in fact, anything at all in writing. Only "I feel like a girl today" as entry into the most private of personal activity of the opposite sex. Consider that the "little girls room" is the only true safe space for a girl in school away from the opposite sex. Obama eliminated that!

My view is that his action was a hissy fit to get back at a challenge to his supreme authority by the governor of North Carolina (since joined by 11 other states) on Obama's "transgender bathroom" rules. But, of course being a "transgender" as defined necessitates an operation to change physical attributes of one's original gender into the opposite. That is not even necessary in Obama's proclamation. Only that one "feels" like "self-identifying" as the opposite gender.

Yes, "truth" is gone from the Progressive Democrat life and "emotion" is the new arrival. Even Obama's science has ceased investigating things and "science" has become a implied majority vote of political advocates about whatever the subject is...Global Climate Change for example. The threat of losing one's tenure, job and government funding assists in that vote being on Obama's side.

Friday, May 27, 2016

Certain: A broke U. S.

Uncertain: Destruction of the world by weather.

The nation’s current total private wealth is $63.5 trillion. Looking 75 years out, the U.S. government expenses exceed future government revenues by $117.9 trillion. That’s trillions, in case you misread: $117,900,000,000,000! This gap is not a fantasy, it is based on entitlement laws already on the books, projections of the future number of pensioners relative to workers and estimates of economic growth.

The federal deficit ballooned to more than $1 trillion for four straight OBAMA fiscal years, 2009 through 2012.

But the President of the political party that is breaking the American "bank," Barack Obama hides this real threat to the solvency and survival of the U. S. A. by stating with a straight face, "The growing threat of climate change could define the contours of this century (whatever THAT means) more dramatically than any other" from the ravages of a warming planet. At the Parisian luxury banquet for climate change action, he urged action even if the benefits (or proof of no threat) were not evident for generations. At that time, though, the USA would be bankrupt. Obama doesn't give a shit what happens later this century because he will have spent that time galavanting around the world giving million dollar speeches and living like a king (and queen).

For sure the USA will be broke. For sure the weather will change. How? No computer program has been accurate so far this century nor last. So there is certainty of belly-up and fantasy of some danger in the weather. Who is the insane fantastist? Get real, vote TRUMP!

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

BUT SERIOUSLY. The Democrats/Progressives/Left parade and lustily objectify near-naked butts, tits, other female parts to titilate and attract viewers, readers and listeners so they can greedily cob big money, big bucks from capitalism.

And they vilify a man who attracts attractive women, hires thousands of women, and promotes them to high levels of managerial employment. He seems to hire (and marry) for intelligence, capability, and supports them. Trump has hired and promoted more females into private-sector, not government-ideological and make-up jobs, than all of the Democrats put together: Obama, Hillary, Biden, Bern Baby Bern, and the rest.

But the Democrat entertainment industry portrays themselves as "progressives" in everything. But showing tits is not progressive in my view. And let's not discuss the insane misogyny of hip-hip: Ho's, cash, guns and killing, stealing, hurting, diminishing, enslaving kid-whores in film and music. These Democrats are trash yet give millions to Obama, Hillary to extend their filthy, lucrative lives.

AND then they praise a female-user-abuser, Bill Clinton and his enabler, Hillary. AND WHY THE F* WOULD ANY "FEMINIST" VOTE FOR HER???? Or if you are an honest female or feminist why would you vote for ANY DEMOCRAT. Answer anyone??????

Please share this with an answer.

My thought:

Power is #1 for Democrats, Money is #2. IN order to maintain this, they need an uneducated citizenry. Voila, the Teachers Union Bosses deliver. As low as only 25% (some say 34%) of high school seniors are capable of performing at college levels. And for African Americans -- the core support for Democrat -- the numbers are worse. Success for Democrats is measured by failure of kids in education. Then raise the minimum wage to price kids out of starting wages. Then "give" them stuff from food stamps to cash for having illegitimate children and absent fathering.

But you don't know this because the Megaphone of the Left -- the New York Times -- and the Alphabet of Propaganda -- NBC CBS ABC CNN AP NPR PBS and if it's still alive msnbc -- WILL NOT TELL YOU ANY OF THIS. Thus, you remain uneducated about the truths of the Obama USA.

Friday, May 13, 2016

Sunday, November 16, 2008

Republicans need to concentrate on the next presidential election and the Congressional races in four years. (But they must careful not to give up any seats in the Senate in two years. Republicans must always keep the number 60 in view.) I think Republicans have that time. I believe Obama will be forced by his desire for re-election in 2012 to govern more in the center, or center-left, not the far left. Though this depends on his strength in standing up to the wildly left Congress and labor union leaders. If he wins in 2012 his deep-seated socialist, anti-business philosophies may well burst forth for him to establish his legacy. Until then, Republicans should be able to block through filibuster much of the overreaching demands on the new President, but need to do so with clear, simple messages. The brilliant political strategy of Franklin Delano Roosevelt sliced and diced the electorate into purchasable minority blocks has been the core of Democratic success over the past nearly 75 years: unions, farmers, elders, blacks, artists and writers (in the media as well as artistic), “intellectuals”, the poor and downtrodden. As FDR created his Democratic Party, it continued to oil new squeaky wheels. Anti-war, Abortion-advocates, homosexuals and other affinity groups were given what they demanded by the Democrats. And Democrats virtually created the trial lawyer industry. Obama used all of them brilliantly.

Democrats are at war with Republicans. Make no mistake. Democrats want power. They are using the lie of “Socialism” – equality for all – versus Capitalism – equal opportunity to all -- to gain and retain power. Democrats want to command how companies are run. Democrats want to control how we live our lives. If Democrats don’t get their way (California Proposition 8, or Seattle’s third runway are only two of thousands of examples) they throw tantrums and either demonstrate or sue, never accepting defeat. Republicans seem to accept defeat and go on. Of course many conservatives are building or managing companies, their first responsibility. Republicans are in a fight as critical to the survival of America as was the Civil War. Voters do not seem to understand this. The Republican Party has failed. Republican leaders do not seem to understand this. The Democratic Party has been engaged in a massive 75-year propaganda effort to discredit capitalism. Many Democrats work for government, quasi-government, or non-profit entities and can devote more time to politics.

I believe Obama won the presidency in 2008 with his charisma and The Big Lie (or, if he actually can perform, The Big Buy) that he’ll cut taxes for 95% of the country and years of press-brutalizing of President Bush. (Interestingly, some recent poll indicated only 17% of voters indentified Republicans with cutting taxes.) Of course Obama was aided by the October Surprise which turned out to be the melt down/bail out (“MDBO”) which shifted emphasis to the “economy” which for some reason Democrats were thought to be able to better manage than the Republicans. But the election – the Presidential Competition 2008 -- is over and Republicans lost. While the actual reasons may be elusive and debated for years, the Republicans lost. Going forward, Republicans need to, if not coordinate, at least unify on a message of pithy simplicity using powerful words that but based on clear ideas. Republicans must not blame. Yes, perhaps Obama was shilled by the media (incorrectly labeled the “popular” or “mainstream” media; Republicans should stop using these terms and substitute the more accurate Left-leaning or Far-left Media or even the Obama Info-media); yes, perhaps he had unsavory friends and promoters; yes, perhaps he voted as the Senate’s #1 liberal; but he won. Republicans must not blame, but must take a positive attitude, cheerily accepting that Obama won.

Our country is something like 35% “liberal”, 40% “conservative” and 25% “independent”. Depending on which polls one reads (some indicate liberals only 22%, conservatives 34% and 44% moderates, which is defferent than independent; varying definitions abound but all map out similarly) but a majority of Americans are center-right and believe that bigger government is not better government and cannot solve all our problems. Republicans must be honest and up front with what government can do and cannot do.

Republicans must get back to the basics. Wealth and jobs are created only by businesses. Successful businesses create products and services that consumers want to buy. Business thrives under markets allowing their founders and managers the freedom to create things and get rich doing so. Businesses succeed or fail for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that consumers don’t want their products or services. Some go out of business, creating disruptions for workers and customers. But typically the disruption is short, workers go to other companies which produce things someone wants to buy. This is the up and down of the business cycle. While “Wall Street” is being blamed for the meltdown (and deregulation) by the Left-leaning Media and Democrats, part of the problem that even Republicans (including Senator McCain) express their belief that Wall Street is like a gambling casino. There is no understanding of its core utility in capital raising. “Wall Street” has financed America since 1792 with the founding of a predecessor of the New York Stock Exchange.

Market- and business-cycles can never be prevented because they emanate from innovation, coupled with opportunity, then success and sometimes greed follows success ending in short-term collapse; all of these are the heart of America having become the greatest economic force in history and the freest nation ever invented. The natural human emotions of greed and fear cannot be squelched, only understood, usually after the fact. Governments cannot prohibit these human emotions, only restrain them by blocking opportunity for people to better themselves. It was against these continuing static classed societies (and religious persecution) that America was founded. It was founded on freedom; to take freedom from loss away is to take freedom of action away. At the very core of this freedom, and America’s success, is the entrepreneur. While today some entrepreneurs are celebrated -- Bill Gates comes to mind -- it is not about the businesses he created, but what “good” is done with the personal wealth created. What needs to be understood and admired in this country is the business – businesses – created. Microsoft changed the world of computing and humanity itself by standardizing software. It created thousands of support and peripheral companies, hundreds of thousands of jobs and countless millionaires and otherwise “rich” people from all walks of life. It also encouraged efficiency, communication and knowledge. Republicans need to personalize the “rich” who have created these jobs, wealth and improved lives. Liberals personalize victims. Republicans need to counter by unabashedly personalizing and praising accomplishment. It should outline and describe the number of people positively impacted by such accomplishment. Today, the face of business is primarily the over-sized compensation of some top executives. [An aside: much of this money was gained from incentive stock options. The widespread use of such options came from a law signed by President Clinton which disallowed companies from expensing executive compensation for earners of over $1 million, so directors substituted incentive stock options and the rising stock market caused options to become absurdly valuable. It is an unintended consequence of a Democratic Party-passed law. Sort of like the Alternative Minimum Tax to hit something like 50 taxpayers which has impacted millions. And to put executive and employee comp in perspective, General Electric has over 300,000 employees. If $100,000,000 were taken out of executive compensation it would only give a $28 monthly raise to each employee.] There is no mention of jobs, wealth created, product innovation, price decreases, increases in standards of living, or extensions of life itself. There seems to be no desire to understand or communicate how truly difficult it is to manage a large company. And, of course, the Left-leaning Media promotes the unfairness of the “stagnation” of middle-class compensation (as if ever-increasing pay is guaranteed in America.) It is against their message to explain the vastly more important concept of “standard of living” which includes what people can actually buy with their dollars earned. The standard of living in the United States has continued upward for decades, but is difficult to measure. Consider the continuing price decreases and increasing utility of computers, cellular phones, the Internet and flat-screen televisions, Blackberrys, global positioning systems, for a few examples. But there is rarely any counterbalancing argument about “income equality” from Republicans.

Republicans must begin to offset the Left’s negative attitude toward “business” which has become pretty mainstream. Where is the proud announcement that union-leader-hated Wal-Mart added over 30,000 employees to nearly 1.5 million, during 2008? The citizenry must be informed. 3.+

Americans in their core do not like to lose. The next step after improving the image of “business”, Republicans must unleash – then own -- the competitive spirit of Americans. We are in direct business competition with foreign countries not just among ourselves. China and India for example, but also England, France, Germany, Japan, Vietnam, South Korea and on and on. Global competition is here to stay – nothing can wind it back. The world’s financial meltdown will accentuate globalism as countries get together to collectively solve economic issues. We as Team/USA must decide to win or lose. Of course,”to win” means continuing to create wealth and better standards of living to struggling peoples all over the world. It is what competition in the free enterprise system has done for the world for over a century. Americans want not to just compete, but to win. To do so means supporting business in America. We need to think how to surge forward, not cut back into ourselves. Republicans need to shout out how “business” not government has created our wealth. Government’s role should be to support business. While the “trickle-down” theory has been discredited by liberals, another snappy term needs to be coined and repeated, over and over. Obama’s Big Lie of cutting taxes for 95% of America was repeated thousands of times and helped win the day for him. Republicans need to repetitively repeat how wealth is only created by business which creates the lasting, productive jobs government cannot create.

What then are the biggest impediments to the support of business and to the success of business itself in the United States? Unions. To gain and retain their selfish pursuit of power, union leaders cast business as negative and unions as positive. Yet, nowhere in the recent Presidential Competition was there anything about unions. Are Republicans afraid of union leaders’ power? What is there to be afraid of? They overwhelmingly support and finance Democrats. And although not necessarily following their leaders’ political leanings, private sector workers who belong to unions are only a small minority of the private work force anyway. Seven-and-a-half percent. The number is twelve percent of government workers. What’s to fear? Yet the leaders of this minority of population pretty much control the Democratic Party. Republicans need to publicize this disparity of power in the hands of a small number of power-hungry union officials. Republicans need to hammer on the fact that unions are not even needed for the workers anymore. The liberal media will holler. But look at what union leaders’ demands have done for what’s left of the airline, steel, and automobile industries. “Follow the money” (as Deep Throat famously said in “All the President’s Men”) and the money flows from union members’ dues to the Democratic Party with union leaders as paymasters. Republicans need to paint union leaders as the self-serving power brokers they are. Young voters under 30 voted two-thirds for Obama, putting him over the top, yet they are the generation wanting freedom of choice. Union leaders try to curtail workers’ freedom and this must be communicated. [And speaking of the young: the Democratic Congress is engaged in internecine warfare among their geriatrics. Henry Waxman, age 69, is challenging 82-year-old John Dingell for chairmanship of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Recently Dingell called Waxman "an anti-manufacturing, left-wing Democrat" on a Detroit radio station. Is this the “politics as usual” that Obama is against? No doubt it's politics as usual, not change, but I don’t see much written about it in the Left Info-media, or by Republicans for that matter.] But back to the unions. Republicans, business and perhaps the Chamber of Commerce need to develop a future strategy which embraces workers explicitly. Give workers – “labor” – a voice the union leaders don’t really give them. Team/USA is competing with the world and to win it must be a team that includes management and labor working together to support business. “Business” must be more all-encompassing and include “labor” as a partner. It can be done. In order for America to win, Republicans must win.

Impediments to business (Part 2): class action trial lawyers (“CATL”). Their typically-unpublicized riches come directly from the consumer through price increases with business as collector and paymaster. It is not widely known that only a tiny amount of each settlement ends up in the hands of a single “victim” (as defined by trial lawyers and their paid, so-called experts) while the winning lawyers buy yachts and jets. I didn’t hear McCain or Palin discussing this “tax” on consumers which, certainly in the case of the tobacco settlement, is highly regressive and damaging to consumers and business.

Businesses, and for that matter individuals too, need stability to operate. Stability in the dollar, which the Bush Administration opposed, needs to become a beacon of the Republican Party. In an increasingly international world currencies need predictability.

I have noticed that Congress seems to be changing the rules continually. It is impossible to plan for the future if one doesn’t understand what the law will be. Part of the “rule of law” must be to have laws that aren’t changed on a whim or headline.

To succeed takes leaders. What about Republican leaders? Here is a most critical single factor to success in anything. Think about the “Front Man (or woman)” of a rock band. (S)he delivers the message and the band together creates the music behind it with producers, writers, and other support people. It wasn’t so much the Democratic Platform which won the 2008 Presidential Competition, but Obama as a young, charismatic Front Man with a disc jockey voice, tall, lean and handsome. He won votes with his charisma coupled with the “tax cut for 95% of Americans” (“The Big Lie”) labeled “change”. Compare Obama’s charisma to President Bush’s or Senator McCain’s. Or don’t. Republicans need to vet – now – its future potential leaders for the “coolness factor” if they want to win. Its next candidates need to stand tall, be proud, positive, and Paul Newman-like (in Cool Hand Luke.) (S)he needs to command respect and be statesmanlike. Gov. Palin was unable to gain that respect. Whether from the incessant and unfair bashing by the Obama Info-media or her own presentation, it doesn’t really matter, she lost. If she’s to remain on the national scene she needs coaching. The Republicans Party must forget democracy when selecting potential leaders. It must select a handful now and watch, guide and support them, like the up-and-comers in a corporation. Republican, Inc. If Republicans are the “party of business” why doesn’t it act like it? Whenever President Bush spoke, I cringed. I found him an uninspiring, mumbling speaker who wasn’t always able to stay on message. Obama however is the opposite. We live in a world of image. Many Obama voters did not know, did not care, about his programs or stands, they simply wanted the man. On television the other night there were a smattering of “comedians” shown whom to a person said they were unable to impersonate or make fun of Obama because he was “cool”. The complete opposite of McCain. Truth certainly can be trumped by image. Obama won in Florida, Arizona and California yet in each state voters supported, for example, eliminating gay marriage, to which he was opposed. The image and issue diverged.

But along with image must come preparedness. Democrats are a formidable enemy who want at any cost to anyone to win. They have formidable allies: paymasters, brainwashers, and foot soldiers. Clearly, Obama led a well-prepared, highly-effective campaign. Obama recruited four million donors and two or three times that to doorknock, phonebank, rally and, of course, vote. His ground game was based on a sophisticated data gathering capability and state of the art computing and Internet use which apparently contains upwards of ten million names with demographic information. His effective grass-roots game may have gotten its foundation from Obama’s early community experience with ACORN. It increased Democratic turnout 2.6% over 2004 (Republicans lost 1.3%). But while Obama’s machine was well-oiled, it was his image that simply swept away the emotions of many.

Republicans need to get off defense, define the playing field and plot offense; it needs leaders like Vince Lombardi with a ”fire in the belly” to win; winning must be life for future Republican candidates. But Republicans must strive for quality on the high road, because the road of the Republicans is the high road. It wants better standards of living for humanity, freedom of thought and action, the pursuit of happiness and equal opportunity, not outcome. These core beliefs must be clearly communicated and the banner carried by a winner. The Republicans’ main “special interest group” is “business”: the creator of jobs, wealth, a higher standard of living, and the entity from which all government funds come. Why doesn’t the public understand this?

Republicans faced hugely-negative headwinds from President Bush and his Congress and McCain did OK, but lost with an undisciplined campaign and little charisma. He could have successfully run against the corrupt Congress (approval rating – zilch), I think that bodes well for the core of Republican beliefs, but not for what it presented.

If a corporation is the metaphor, Republican, Inc.’s potential voters are its customers. And like all customers, they want to gain satisfaction from their “purchase” – their vote. They want to be both excited and comforted. I believe Americans inherently are positive not negative. The continuing message from the Left is negative. “The Bush tax cuts for the richest Americans”; “The rich get richer”. “The middle class is stagnating”. “Executives are corrupt, paid too much and do little”. “Deregulation caused the MDBO”. “The free enterprise system doesn’t work, vote for government”. Voters – the customers – don’t want these messages of denigration and negativity. Yet, Republicans only respond to the Democratic messages, they don’t create their own positive statements. Reagan won by communicating positives. Voters want to feel good about programs and trust their leaders to execute as they promised. Voters feel good – even giddy -- about Obama. And here Republicans need to go on the offensive. Voters as a whole expect much from Obama, not necessarily concrete specifics, and his implicit promises. Each voter will define Obama’s “change” as (s)he sees it. Such fuzzy expectations are impossible to fulfill. (Seventy per cent of voters believe race relations will automatically improve.) “Obama”, the image in which they believe, not the person, may backfire with disappointment and Republicans need to be there to commiserate with the voters, expressing disappointment, and feel sad not glad. Republicans need to be bipartisan and voice support, encouragement and hope for Obama, the image. Sex sells and Obama sold it. Republicans need to verify that it was a good choice voters made and that when he fails to deliver on his promises, it is Obama’s failure, not the voters’. Disappointment will run deep. Republicans can help boost expectations by promoting Obama’s promises, celebrating them and hoping he will make them come true. Democrats will attempt to blame Republicans for the abandonment of “Pay Go’, a higher deficit, the recession and Obama’s inability to deliver. Republicans must be ready and prepared with effective responses or begin an offense to undercut the Democrats’ excuses.

After 9-11, President Bush held the esteem of the country. After the war wasn’t immediately “won”, his approval began a downward run. How did that happen? Was it pushed by the Far-left Media, the New York Times, NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN? Exactly how was that successful debasement of Bush accomplished? Republicans need to study the power, reach and messaging of the media and develop strategies and objectives for its messaging. Apparently Fox News and the Wall Street Journal aren’t sufficiently partisan; they seem to think people need fair, balanced and accurate “news”. Perhaps Republicans should study whether the Obama Info-media orchestrated the Clinton failure and McCain candidacy. More people read the Wall Street Journal than the New York Times; more people watch Fox News, but it seems the Left-leaning media establishes the playing field. A number of issues – real or propaganda – led to the Republican demise in Congress in 2004, 2006 and again in 2008. To simplify: the war, the deficit and "corruption". Each issue seemed framed and presented by the Far-left Media and hammered into the consciousness of the American people. Republicans did not fight back. Yes, the initial execution of the war was not effective; no, the deficit was not Republican-abirthed; no, Republicans do not have a monopoly of corruption or “morals” issues. But Bush was bashed badly and continually for 6 years. Why? The “why” should be understood, but not copied. And at least one writer suggested that the New York Times positioned McCain to be the Republican nominee and then pulled the rug from under him. While Republicans believe that foreign dictators should not be trusted and believed, they seem to trust and believe in the Democratic Party that wants to take down Republican America. Bush and his Republican Congress expanded government and entitlement programs and other than cutting taxes for the rich, did little one could define as “conservative”, and for what reason, I cannot fathom.

Some other truths. Republicans must ask African Americans, "Just what have the Democrats really done for you?" The answer, in my opinion, is to keep you down for three generations. Union-staffed inner city schools, the vast majority of the student body of which are minorities. Graduation rates hover around 50% against upwards of 75% for whites and more for Asians. What have the Democratic-backed unions done for African Americans? Crime? Something like half the prison population is African American and young. What have liberal judges done for African Americans? "Illegitimate" (unmarried) pregnancies? Abortion? Fatherless families? All are far higher for African Americans than other populations. The Democrats have been in charge of Congress for most of the last 50 years. They have taxed Americans to feed a Democrat-voting civil rights bureaucracy ("CRB" or "CRIB") in the government that has been less than useless to African Americans. In fact, I argue that the CRB has and has had huge incentives to keep the African American population down. That way they can have funded all flavors of liberal activities which need management and workers. More power for CRIB's management and leaders. Much of these liberal activities consist of pounding the message in to African American psyches that they cannot get ahead because of slavery a century ago and discrimination by whites. Think what would happen if African Americans told the Jesse Jacksons/Al Sharptons of the CRB, "Get lost, we can start companies, create wealth and jobs all by ourselves, we are as smart and enterpreneural as anyone"? All of a sudden, the CRIBs wouldn't have anything to do and as it folded, so would fold a strong and loyal Democratic bloc. Democrats can't allow that to occur. But are Republicans afraid of the Left Info-media's response? Would Republicans rather be liked by liberals than control the politics of our country and steer it where it ought to go? Seems so. Does anyone in rationally thinking about the issue, really think the Democratic Party has helped the African Americans gain independence and self-respect? If not tell the voters!

Republican incompetence gave away the Hispanic vote. “Immigration” hammered Republicans this year. Hispanics voted 44% for Bush but left the Republican Party, voting only 33% for McCain. Some argue it was the Republican stand, others poor communication. No doubt immigration will continue as people want to come to America, but it can certainly better managed. The successful disposition of “illegal” immigrants is a core issue in America. Republicans have done a poor job of dealing with it and communicating. Hispanics are a growing percentage of the population with many values in synch with Republicans. They need to be given a voice in the Republican Party.

While expressing freedom in markets, Republicans seem to want to also control personal social issues. I will discuss below. But Republicans should concentrate on business, jobs and a free economy. The umbrella of successful free-enterprise can allow special interests to pursue their goals under it. Choice and right-to-life; gay marriage; campaign financing; [drugs; crime; welfare; ?] Will it lose some Republicans? Yes. But notice Democrat African Americans, Hispanics, coupled with the Mormons and the “religious right’ to vote down the right for gays to marry in California, Arizona and Florida. Republicans need to concentrate and focus on creating a free, wealthy, inclusive and opportunistic economy under which these special and affinity groups can operate.

Republicans should be silent on abortion. It does not belong in today’s world as a campaign issue. Most of the country believes in a woman’s right to choose to have or not an abortion. This belief can’t be rolled back. Republicans should leave personal social issues alone not for political purposes but to support individual freedom.. Certainly Republicans can promote education for women so they don’t have to make a choice. It can promote easy, safe adoption. But leave personal social issues alone. Gay marriage is another personal social issue. It, as abortion, is in the province of religion and one’s beliefs. Government should not interfere. Individuals are becoming independent of party.

Republicans should promote real campaign finance reform but opening it up to individuals but making it transparent where an Obama cannot hide from where his millions came. Prohibit coercion by monopolies such as labor unions. Let the leaders spend their own money not union dues, the same for corporate leaders, but not corporations, and lobbyist organizations. There should be “whistle-blower” laws about campaign contributions.

The Democratic Party has split the citizenry into affinity groups – which can be obnoxiously loud and throw tantrums when their way is thwarted by such things as a majority of the voters -- financed by the rich to gain its power. Republicans must get to the rest, the quiet center offering: economic freedom, with true “safety nets” such as the FDIC for those who really can’t make it., not vote-getting welfare. Republicans must make being responsible cool, fight earmarks and corruption in Congress and Washington DC, and let those in the silent majority that they have been taken for saps. It can win by offering opportunity not guarantees; freedom not control; low, not burdensome taxes; effective, honest government; It can stress honesty and fair play.

Monday, May 9, 2016

In “Hard Truths About Race On Campus” (Wall Street Journal, Review, May 7 – 8,
2016, pages C1 & 2 [http://www.wsj.com/articles/hard-truths-about-race-on-campus-1462544543]) Professors Haidt and Jussim seem to miss some observations that might be
additive to their arguments. When I was starting out in business in San Francisco,
activism began on college campuses with the seed being the Vietnam War. That
new Left wanted to bring down those in power (conservative Republicans) or just have irresponsible fun (sex, drugs and rock ‘n roll) but sadly they were
taken seriously. Many college administrators gave in to their demands, and
human nature being what it is, if your demands are fulfilled, you demand more.
And more. The greater Progressive Left figured out that giving the kids what
they demanded would buy allegiance and votes. And it has worked: today, a large
majority of university administrators, instructors and students are Democrats. A
vast voting bloc of something around 21 million college attendees in the 4725-some
institutions of higher education.
One strategy of the Left to gain and retain power has always been the collectivization of individuals (making them
easier to herd) through a divide and conquer strategy. It segments groups by,
say, skin color -- "race" -- sexual choices, gender, net worth, and so
on. It figures out how to get their votes, executes and puts each group in the
shopping bag labeled, Progressive Democrat Voter. Race is one of the groups. At
the same time, the Left wants more and more students (voters), and the way is to make
it easier to get in to college. But to get them in, standards need to be
lowered (“affirmative action”) and classes and grading need to be easier to
keep the students happy. That means continuing to give in to student demands.
But as always the strident activist students seem to speak for all the students
(the collective). And also as usual, the media loves the activists for the
readers and viewers they attract. Summing up, the policies of the left include
affirmative action, easy majors (yes, diversity, gender, ethnic and cultural
studies, that which we used to call "underwater basket weaving.) And easy grading.

Now consider that today the federal
government, through a variety of schemes (including President Obama's takeover
of the student loan industry) is the prime financing entity for higher
education. Remember that the Golden Rule No. 1 is, "Who has the gold makes
the rules." So the federal
government makes the rules and college presidents obey, knowing that
without the gold they would have no institution. What is the goal of the Obama
Democrats running the educational show? Power, gaining and retaining power
through votes. Whatever the student activists want, the financier, the federal
government, and the administrators give in. It all comes together for the
benefit of the Democratic Party at the expense of the nation.

The
Left does not want any assessment or even knowledge of these true goals.
For example, the oppression against climate change "deniers"
is not about global warming, but about the danger of the scientific method itself,
measuring and assessing the Left's various narratives. The authors write:
"such reforms [of affirmative action and diversity training] will fail
to…reduce discrimination and inequality." And "make life more
uncomfortable for everyone, particularly black students." That seems to be
a goal of the Left; if it was all comfortable and everyone got along, the power
of the Left would be marginalized.

Finally,
please consider the actual words and phrases the professors used: marginalized,
racial gaps, welcoming, inclusive culture, sense of ethnic victimization, feel
denigrated or insulted, microaggression, and so on. Each word or concept is
absolutely subjective, undefinable. They are not only impossible to measure,
but each are individualized emotions particular to each student. They cannot be
collectivized. One kid's "microaggression" is different than
another's and, in fact, generally not anything the the microaggressor
wanted. There is nothing rational about any of it that can be measured. The loudest squeak gets oiled.
So colleges must cater to the most
effective advocate or publicized activist with more and more demands. The promised ground of the Left.

The
authors finish with: “The time may be right for a bold college president to
propose a different approach, one based on the available evidence about what
works and what doesn’t. That would be the best way to create a university
community in which everyone feels welcome.” But that could easily risk financial
support from the federal government as well as the student hordes calling for
the resignation of the “bold college president.” There does not seem to be any
solution.

Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Trump won the primary in Indiana last night. The state to which a great grandfather of mine settled (in Lafayette) after emigrating from Dublin, Ireland in the mid-1800s. Cruz and Kasich gave up their Don Quixote lunges, leaving Donald Trump the Republican candidate presumably. Unless the Republican powers-to-be elect Hillary Clinton. No matter what the left-wing pollsters and media (The Megaphone of the Left, The New York Times, the Washington Post and the Alphabet of Propaganda, NBC CBS ABC CNN AP, NPR, PBS, and useless msnbc, et.al.) proclaim, Trump has the momentum and Hillary the boredom. "They" still announce that Hillary will trounce Trump and take back Congress. I believe that most -- way-most non-Democrat Lemming- -- Americans are sick and tired of...a lousy economy, being told what to do and say by Washington, D. C. self-proclaimed elites, rabid anti-Christian, pro-Islam advocacy, ISIS, government inefficiency, and, for business owners and managers, a target on their backs, and their companies' backs, drawn arbitrarily by self-enriching politicians, billionaire investors and Obama. Finally their Christian beliefs are racist and bigoted and that they -- the religious -- must bend to whatever the Left tells them to do. Serve gay weddings, or eliminate in any toilet depending on how they "self-identify" or actually the entire concept of "self-identification" or feelings trumping the science of genders or reality.

The Left is telling them that free enterprise and capitalism are "rigged" against them while politicians -- especially the prexy and wife -- taxpayer-paid, fly around the world on vacation or dictating to former allies (England, Germany, Israel) and most every other country to love love love homosexuality, diversity, government and whatever else President Obama thinks of that day. They do not like their protectors in police officers and the military being degraded by the afore-mentioned "leader of the free world."

They do not appreciate a man telling them and the world how evil their great and beloved country is, has been and always will be unless he -- President Obama alone -- can save it. They are uncomfortable that minority and minority minorities get all the publicity, energy and taxpayer money and they -- the majority "white" and Jewish people who have assimilated from their origins in Germany, England, Japan, China, Viet Nam, Mexico, South America and every other country -- are labeled racist, bigoted, automatically successful and undeserving. As if none had ever labored, worked, contributed, made their ways in the face of push-back and discrimination as well as intense competition for jobs and opportunities.

Trump is no litmus tester, Progressive only -- blue -- or with conservative principles -- red, the very thought and action that has separated the country more than ever except for the Civil War; in fact, this thinking is causing the Second Civil War in America for its heart and soul. Hopefully Trump will read up, listen to a broad array of competing experts (he knows them all) and make decisions not as blue (100% of Obama's decision-making) or red (conservative principles), but red, white and blue to actually benefit "We the People."

He has a long road in front of him. But it is up to him to detour off "The Road to Serfdom" that the Progressive tyranny has paved. Candidate Obama destroyed Candidate Hillary 8 years ago. He won with little history divulged (it still is tightly controlled by his campaign and the media) and no telegraphed clue that he would ignore the Constitution and Rule of Law and his oath or affirmation of office to defend it. Obama did not enforce Defense of Marriage Act, Immigration laws and drug enforcement among many other laws as he had sworn to do. Hillary's policies will be anything that assists and strengthens her self and party, including most all the Socialist Bernie wants. Against free enterprise business, for gigantic government and breaking up one of the most innovative, important and profitable industries: banking. Trump has hired thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of people, he has fired, he has trained, he has succeeded. Trump has failed in some individual companies: Trump University, some casinos, and, I am certain, others. But he did not stop and cry, he learned, persevered and went on to take risks again. He embodies the American Spirit, the American Dream more than any other president EVER!

Monday, May 2, 2016

Happy Death to you, Happy Death to you, Happy Death Dear Osama Bin Laden, Happy Death to you. It was 5 years ago today that Navy Seals executed a plan to execute a founding terrorist of today's Islamic Terrorist Jihad beheading philosophy. Apparently it took President Obama six months to make up his mind and apparently John Podesta's relentless persuasion to do it.

But today I want to discuss the Peoples Republic of China and the United States of America and Donald Trump.

The United States of America is responsible for the emergence and success of modern-day China. It buys the products that China manufactures. China has been able to produce for a materially lower cost than the U. S. There are several reasons. 1) There are millions of unemployed Chinese workers; 2) Their wages are significantly lower than the wages in the U. S., but China's costs are rising; 3) The U. S. has militant anti-business union bosses who need increasing wages to keep their jobs by keeping their dues-payers happy. No matter that unionized companies cannot compete successfully with China. 4) The U. S. has a massive regulatory regime that all by itself increases costs greatly. It is political and used to garner votes for Democrats. Included are class-action lawsuits (which courtesy of Democrat legislation is one of the large American industries, which donates solely and solely to...Democrats) , environmental rules from unelected far-left zealots, the micromanagement of executive actions, including posting government employees in the offices and boardrooms of companies. Hiring, training and retention programs of businesses are second-guessed and mistrusted as "discriminatory" -- business people are biased and need to be told how and who to hire. The Democrats as a collective do not trust business people. As well, they do not trust individual consumers to be able to make "sound" decisions in the face of misleading company advertising. 5) Too, Chinese leaders over the past decades have made a concerted effort to modernize its commercial activities, freeing entrepreneurship, opening its markets as well, and adopting many tenets of the United States' free enterprise. (While the U. S. goes back to where China was with wrongheaded central control of its economy by Democrat professorial "elites." It is diminishing the competitiveness of the U. S.)

China produces things cheaper than the U. S. Companies are able and one especially, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., spotted this opportunity decades ago and has built gigantic retail outlets featuring broad, broad selections at lower prices. Originally store were located in rural areas where there was no competition. From one store in 1962 Bentonville, Arkansas, Walmart has grown to be the world's largest retailer by revenues. It is attacked relentlessly by union bosses and Democrats but beloved by consumers and workers who flock to new stores ten to twenty applicants for each job.

Though Donald Trump rails against China for "currency manipulation" -- it is a misplaced attack. The almighty Federal Reserve-controlled dollar is just as manipulated as the renminbi but for different reasons. While China desires growth, the Democrats in charge of the U. S. economy -- currency valuations -- want to be reelected first and foremost. The disaster which was the Great Recession or sub-prime meltdown was caused by Democrats in government. The Clinton Department of Housing and Urban Development dictated "affordable housing" (as it alone defines it) of 30% which in essence needed people to buy houses who couldn't afford them. An arbitrary goal around which regulations were built. Quasi-governmental entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mae, leadership of which was populated by Democrats and which donated millions to Members of Congress, especially Chris Dodd, Senator from Hedge Fund Connecticut and Barney Frank, New York's Wall Street Congressman. They supported the Democrat managements of Fan and Fred and pushed the arbitrary affordable housing quota percentage -- continuing to slide regulations as Democrats do, to worse consequences -- to an insane and, of course arbitrary, 56%. More poor people couldn't pay. But triggering the "meltdown" was the inability of some financial organizations to refinance short-term obligations because their assets were invested long-term...in those mortgages. People heading governmental agencies, including up to the Secretary of the Treasury and the President himself panicked and made decisions that made the economy worse. I believe that if it would have been left alone by politicians there would never have been the Great Recession, bad mortgages, homeowner defaults and the rest. But after all, governments are made up of emotional human beings.

True, the monumental rush of mortgage originations and refinancings created inefficiencies in the back offices. Some workers missed some steps and documentation necessary by government regulation, and, as they say: "Mistakes were made." No borrowers were affected by all this confusion.

As a result of these politicians came the big recession and a pathetic "recovery" of only a couple percent a year throughout Obama's term, the worst since the Great Depression (which from time to time had been even better!) Up to the last quarter's 0.5% growth (Q1, 2016) and an expected 2% for this entire year. Horrible. (Without all these political mortgage manipulations and dictates, Canada has had higher homeownership than America! Go figure.)

Without Democrats and their incessant push for tighter micromanagement and regulatory overreach, lawsuits from Democrat trial lawyers, and Democrat union bosses, would the cost of things in the United States be the same as China, enriching the U. S. and beggaring China? NO! But the imbalance would not be so great. Trump would not be able to use "currency manipulation" as a platform plank in his election repertory. True joblessness in the U. S. would be lower and possibly far more African Americans would have jobs.

Thursday, April 14, 2016

In Islam, the concept of 72 houri (virgins) refers to an aspect of Jannah (Paradise). This concept is grounded in Qur'anic text which describes a sensual Paradise where believing men are rewarded by being wed (as defined) to virgins with "full grown", "swelling" or "pears-shaped" breasts. The content of the Koran is so disgustingly pornographic that some alive men may need ghusl (ablution) after sexual discharge just for hearing certain verses. Great! Most men use the Internet for such filth. Some Islamic scholars understand Paradise to be a female slave market where you can't buy and sell women but you can have sex with them "at once." Rape, in the real world. And as WikIslam writes: "The perpetual virgins will all 'have appetizing vaginas', and that the 'penis of the Elected never softens. The erection is eternal.' I can see why Obama love love loves Islam: It will put out of business the pharmaceutical companies that make Viagra and its many offshoots. And it fits in with the irrational fantasy that is Progressive Democraticism.

Enough of THAT fantasy.

Now let's get to the New York Times, the Megaphone of the Left as the Koran is the Megaphone of Islam. And the Alphabet of Propaganda, NBC CBS ABC CNN AP NPR PBS and last and least msnbc. And the beliefs of the President of the Democrats, Barack Obama. And the next president of the Democrats (excuse the following denunciation) The Bitter Old Biddy with Baggage. And other meaningfuls, TR, FDR and LBC. (JFK would be included but he slashed income taxes so is no longer a Democrat). To True Believers, these bringers of deception describe a world devastated by the Capitalism of Republicans, where individuals have an American Dream and the freedom to think, talk, write and act on it. But they are not True Believers of Progressivism, and so they must be muzzled. Rights end where Republicans disagree with the beliefs of True Believers. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is so outmoded. And a written Rule of Law? How unbelieving. If you believe in YOUR (Democrat) political party, you don't need anything in writing. TRUST! NOW there are our Betters -- the Elites from university and the Democratic Party -- to lead us to Paradise, where we don't have any fears, anxieties, triggers, or responsibilities or work; a sensual Paradise where believing men and women and African Americans and Hispanics and LBGTQRSTs can do whatever they want, not just sexual intercourse with the perpetual 72. Most anything.

Saturday, April 9, 2016

The TRUMP Tea PartyThe
Tea Party
was a spontaneous movement of Americans horrified by the election and
inauguration of President Barack Obama. The instant impetus was a call by the CNBC
television editor of its Business News Network on June 14, 1999, against
Obama’s Homeowners Affordability and Stability Plan (HASP). It proved to be a
ineffective program with a goal of giving away $75,000,000,000 in taxpayers’
money to help those homeowners whom he thought were cheated by greedy and
dishonest bankers. Banks were to forgive principal and reduce monthly payments
to 31% of a homeowner’s gross monthly income (disincentivizing success)
dictating that banks chip in some and taxpayers the rest. There was no study of
why homeowners couldn’t make timely payments only that the burden of guilt was
on Obama’s perception that business people are dishonest and that only the
federal government is capable of making it all right, and easy on homeowners.
(When HASP didn’t work out, in 2009 came HAMP with its HHF – Hardest Hit Fund
under TARP, the Troubled Asset Relief Program, and part of Obama’s MHA, Making
Home Affordable thing -- and HARP – Home Affordable Modification Program and Home Affordable Refinance Program – to help
near-underwater homeowners refinance mortgages after home prices plummeted
after 2007 – which didn’t work so HARP 2.0 was dictated the end of 2011 to
eliminate any limit of negative equity in refinancing. Yes, HASP HAMP HARP HHF MHA
and TARP all were a TRAP. And that trap enraged many Americans who had been
rational, careful and prudent and vehemently disagreed with their hard-earned
tax money being used to bail out those who had not been rational, careful or
prudent. Many held that Obama’s inexperience and lack of much contact with the
world of commerce led him to want to give bank and taxpayer money away
immediately rather than taking the time and intellectual effort to understand
the problems, the causes and improvise some lasting solutions.

The
people’s lack of any control over the president’s unilateral and wrongheaded
expenditures of hundreds of billions of THEIR dollars, led to their forming
various entities under the banner of the Tea Party. It was chaotic, with no central
leader, formal structure or agreement on issues other than a desire for a
smaller, more customer(taxpayer)-friendly government. In March, 2009, the
Taxpayer March on Washington was held as similar protests arose in cities
around the country. Ranges of attendee estimates were from 75,000 by the
left-leaning media punditry to 800,000 by the conservative FreedomWorks which
organized it. People gathered at the Freedom Plaza and marched, speaking,
singing, chanting and waving the American Flag, to Capitol Hill, where speakers
included present and former members of Congress. It was a wake-up call to the
Progressive Democrats who then began to systematically destroy the Tea Party. Paul
Krugman, chief Nobel barker of the Megaphone of the Left, the New York Times, described
its “pathological meanspiritedness.” On the Alphabet of Propaganda, NBC, CBS,
ABC, AP, CNN, NPR, PBS and “who’s watching” msnbc and its ilk came, “cheap
demagoguery,” “racism,” “War on Women,” and the capper, “the American Taliban.” Except for a further ultimate disgust attributed to
President Obama: “tea bagger,” a deeply derogatory unpresidential sexual
quote. To enrage his members before a speech by
that same hate-monger, President Obama, late 2011 in Detroit, Teamsters
President Jimmy Hoffa, Jr., had some dangerously violent comments about the Tea
Party: “Let's Take These Sons of Bitches Out!” And gaining steam, the Progressive
Democrats greatly damaged the Tea Party leaving it listless. Though it did
leave remnants in some policies of the conservative Republican Congress and
Speaker of the House of Representatives and former vice president nominee, Paul
Ryan. The mind- and truth-less Huffington Post ran a detailed piece blaming the
devils themselves, the Koch Brothers, employer to over 75,000 Americans, for
financing the very birth of what the Left had already ground into becoming
simply an annoyance with no political threat.

But then came 2015 and the initial jousting for the presidential
candidacy. And the outsider’s outsider, Donald J. Trump, speaking forcefully
and unrehearsed for the white working class feeling left behind by the
politicians. It was the angry, voiceless Tea Party suddenly with a leader. The
elites, the establishment both Democrat and Republican, were once again
awakened – threatened – by a spontaneous uprising but this time by a man with
charisma and money. And a devil-may-care disdain for their very establishment
comfort and power.Millions of Americans
were moved to action once again and voted for him as their leader, their
candidate for the president of the United States. Trump was no
read-the-Teleprompter Obama or stringently rehearsed and practiced Hillary (“The
Bitter Old Biddy with Baggage” – my description). He was authentically outspoken.

A surprisingly strong and vocal “We the People” once again
threatened the establishment…from the President of the United States of America
to Wall Street banks to union bosses, trial lawyers to Congressional patronage
with cushy jobs including hundreds or perhaps thousands of lobbyists. The easy
stasis of expropriating trillions from taxpayers to retain power was at risk.
They needed to emasculate the man.

The anti-Trump rhetoric is intense, repetitive and follows the
Progressive playbook of personal denunciation of every aspect of the man. But
“We the People” who have not been cowed or brainwashed by its effective
propaganda still believe that the country can be taken back by the people. But
up against them are the government workers implanted by Obama, union bosses who
command Obama, trial lawyers who finance the Left, the entertainment industry,
the afore-mentioned non-Wall Street Journal, non-Fox media, the educational
establishment from pre-K through Ph. D. and the administrators. But more
troubling are the Venezuelan-like people who depend on the unsustainable
deficit spending of the federal government in so many ways.

In all likelihood the next president of the United States will be
a woman who gives off the appearance of corruption and has, under the umbrella
of her husband’s blackness (dishonest-wise, not racial) and his name, been
given the unearned pedestal. She is desperately needed by the President of the
Democrats, Barack Obama, to spin into a beneficial “legacy” his abject failure;
his self-acknowledged abuse of power causing a flat domestic economy where
competitiveness and the American Dream have been replaced by the easy political
correctness of diversity, free stuff and monetizing all aspects of life,
destroying the (right from the Declaration of Independence) pursuit of
individual happiness and denouncing all the United States of America has
accomplished for the world and most everyone in it. And to alter the perception of the fact that
his international cowardness has created an unstable world threatened by
Islamic terrorism and ISIS.

Friday, March 11, 2016

In order to escape the embarrassing actions of the Establishment Right and the Old-lady Left, my beloved wife and are visiting close friends in the Republica Dominicana. NOT Cuba since dictators steal, imprison and kill their fellow countrymen who disagree with tyranny. And though the President of the Democrats embraces the Castros, Chavez (may he rest in hell), Hamas, the ayatollahs and other dictators and terrorists, I vehemently disagree with him.

Friday, March 4, 2016

A Random Walk Through Today's Wall Street Journal

Another takeover of an industry: He wants to stop
commissions, he see’s selling anything on commission is unscrupulous since
everyone is business is crooked and all consumers are naïve and stupid. He’ll
fix everything as he wants it.

Firms say change will drive up compliance costs and could
force them to drop middle-class clients

“The Obama administration is changing the structure of the
stock brokerage industry to better control it in the future. This will make
bigger firms even bigger and destroy much of the competition. Obama wants to
eliminate all commission-based sales. He thinks all sales people are dishonest
and his way: fees, are the only way to protect the helpless consumer.

“Thousands of small brokerages are
bracing for a tighter rule governing investments they recommend to retirement
savers, a change they say will drive up compliance costs and could force them
to drop middle-class clients.

“The idea of the regulation, which
could be released this month by the Labor Department, seems unobjectionable
enough—that brokers would follow a ‘fiduciary’ standard when making investment
recommendations. Currently, brokers’ advice only has to be ‘suitable,’ which
critics say is a weaker standard that allows the sale of expensive products
that eat into returns.

The rule’s opponents, including many in the brokerage industry, say it will increase their costs and make providing
investment advice to small-balance retirement accounts less profitable.

Already, anticipation of the rule is
pushing some companies to scale back their business in the brokerage area. The
associated compliance costs were a key motivator, among other factors, behind
American International Group Inc.’s decision in January to sell its brokerage
unit, AIG Advisor Group.

About $3 trillion of more than $7
trillion in individual retirement accounts is expected to be affected by the
rule, according to research firm Morningstar Inc. About $19 billion in revenue
related to those IRA assets could be affected, and operating margins on IRA
assets could fall up to 30%, Morningstar said.

“Shift in the way payments are made emphasizes quality of
care over quantity”

Obama believes all providers of healthcare are dishonest and
will change that according to his own politics or beliefs…having never touched
the private sector or the industry. He is changing it to his hope. Yes,
consumer you are stupid.

“WASHINGTON—Obama
administration officials said Thursday they were almost a year ahead
of their target to change the way Medicare pays hundreds of billions of dollars
to providers for treating older Americans.” This is his definition of ‘quality
of care’ or that of Harvard Elites.

“The Department of
Health and Human Services had wanted the federal insurance program for seniors
to make 30% of its payments to doctors and hospitals on the basis of the
quality of care they provide, rather than the quantity, by the end of 2016.
That was seen as a step toward hitting 50% by 2018, beyond the lifespan of the
Obama administration.”

Of course all
definitions are political and based on the need to make political achievement
for Obama’s Legacy rather than actually providing better care and lower prices.
More bureaucrats rarely achieve those two goals. Obama said of his headguy: “You
get bragging rights this year!” He said. “You’re proof that the law works.” And
“We’ve been moving Medicare to a payment model that rewards quality of care
over volume,” clearly ignoring that an aging population will force “volume.”

“Housing market is starting to heat up, but understaffed
city governments are failing to keep pace”

“Bradley Gaskins,
chairman of the codes and standards committee of the American Institute of
Architects, said the group’s members are seeing permit approvals take six to
eight months in hot markets such as Florida and California, versus the typical
two to three months.

“The delays come
as housing affordability is a growing challenge in many cities around the
country. Rents have risen 20% over the past five years, according to data
provider Reis Inc. and home prices have risen 25% during the same period,
according to the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Index.

“In Denver, home
prices have shot up more than 40% over the past four years, according to
Case-Shiller, while rents have jumped 25%, according to Reis.”

***

The American
political divide brings smaller spending increases demanded by Republicans than
Democrats. But increases anyway. Corruption. Maybe Trump is the answer.

“Health panel’s Democrats plan to offer their own version in
unusual move”

“WASHINGTON—Senate
Republicans are moving ahead with their own legislation to relax Food and Drug
Administration approval processes and boost medical-research funding, after
talks to produce a bipartisan bill broke down.

“The legislation
being developed by Senate Republicans would create an NIH Innovation Fund to
pay for certain priorities of the Obama administration, according to Sen.
Alexander. He declined to specify how much would go to this fund, though the
administration is asking for amounts of about $1 billion or more. The
Democrats’ bill calls for $5 billion in annual new funding for the NIH and the
FDA.

“The fund would
pay for Vice President Joe Biden’s cancer “moonshot,” the president’s Precision
Medicine Initiative on genetic health research and help fund the work of young
scientific investigators.”

“Obama is encouraging loan recipients to claim they were
misled by colleges. Guess who will pay.”

“Last
month President Obama announced the creation of a ‘Student Aid Enforcement Unit’
that could end up costing taxpayers billions of dollars and reduce access to
career training in the U.S. Housed in the Education Department, this unit
follows the president’s complaint last year that many schools—especially
career-training, for-profit schools—rely heavily on federally funded loans yet
do not reliably graduate students equipped for jobs.

“The Student Aid Enforcement Unit will greatly increase the
use of two little-known Education Department regulations, first enacted in
1994. The ‘borrower defense’ permits students to claim they owe nothing on
their student loans because they enrolled based on a school’s misleading
assertions about job-placement and graduation rates. The ‘closed school’
regulation relieves students from their debt when a school they are attending
shuts down. Federal education loans that are forgiven become liabilities of the
government, i.e., the taxpayers.

“Now that students are being
encouraged to claim that they were misled, a small industry has already taken root, with online forms asking students if they feel they have
been misled and then detailing how they can file for relief from loan
repayment. Class action law suits are also being readied and filed to discharge even more
student loans.

“Certainly, the federal government has a
responsibility to protect students from bad schools engaged in deceptive
practices, especially since the federal government provides over $100 billion
in loans each year to students enrolled in public, private and proprietary
college and universities.

“The
expansion of the application of borrower-defense regulations—from a handful of
cases over 20 years to potentially thousands annually—has opened the door for
any students, from any institution, nonprofit or for-profit, to claim they were
lured to the school by deceptive practices. As the new Student Aid Enforcement
Unit (which adjudicates the claims based on state laws) overflows with
claimants alleging unfulfilled promises of employment, postgraduate education
or a rewarding career, taxpayers will be left holding the bag.”

“After the cool, weak and endlessly nuanced Obama, no wonder
voters are going for a strong, blunt leader.”

“President Obama doesn’t get enough
credit for his accomplishments. I know this because he often tells us it is so.
I happen to agree that he doesn’t get enough credit. No, not for slowing the
rise of the oceans or healing the planet, as he immodestly claimed he would,
even before taking office. He has succeeded handsomely, though, in living up to
his vow to be a transformative president, like Ronald Reagan, and not an
incremental one in the Bill Clinton mold. Mr. Obama has accomplished many
changes—they just aren’t the ones we were waiting for.

“Mr. Obama has alienated allies like
Israel while encouraging adversaries like Iran and Cuba. He has fostered
Americans’ record-breaking dependence on government programs and record-low
participation in the workforce. He has expanded the power, size and expense of
the federal government in unprecedented ways, all at the expense of Americans’
freedom, standard of living and economic well-being.

“But the president truly doesn’t get
enough credit for creating one of the most polarizing forces in American
politics today. No, not Hillary—that is more Bill’s doing. Let’s be honest:
There would be no Donald
Trump, dominating the political scene
today if it were not for President Obama.

“I believe that voters tend to act
in open-seat presidential elections to correct for the perceived deficiencies
of the incumbent. In 1980, after four years of President Carter’s telling us to
turn up the thermostat and wear a cardigan, while the Soviets invaded
Afghanistan and the Iranians invaded the U.S. Embassy, the fed-up American
people elected a cowboy to the White House who made it clear that the evil
empire’s days were numbered.

“After eight years of President
Reagan’s supply-side economics and broadsides against welfare queens, we got a
kinder, gentler President H.W. Bush. After four years of international
diplomacy without the “vision thing,” we got a loquacious Arkansas governor
promising to invent a third way forward focused on the economy at home. After
eight years of Clintonian empathy and skirt-chasing, we got a plain-spoken
President George W. Bush, who promised to restore integrity to the Oval Office.
After Hurricane Katrina and post-Hussein Iraq, we got the professorial
President Barack Obama, who seemed to many to promise competence.

“After seven years of the cool, weak
and endlessly nuanced “no drama Obama,” voters are looking for a strong leader
who speaks in short, declarative sentences. Middle-class incomes are stagnant,
and radical Islam is on the march across the Middle East. No wonder voters are
responding to someone who promises to make America great again. You can draw a
straight line between a president who dismisses domestic terrorist attacks as
incidents of workplace violence and a candidate who wants to ban Muslims from
entering the country.

“Mr. Obama likes to bemoan the
increasing partisan divides across the country, as if he were merely a passive
observer at best and a victim at worst. Uncharacteristically, the president is
being too modest. He has created the very rancor he now rails against. Imagine
how different things would be if Mr. Obama had pursued a stimulus bill that
included targeted tax cuts and infrastructure spending balanced with gradual
entitlement reforms—instead of a stimulus that merely dusted off congressional
Democrats’ wish list of pork-barrel projects and ideological experiments.

“Imagine if Mr. Obama had actually
worked with Republicans in an open process to bring down health-care
costs—instead of pushing through, on a partisan vote, the largest expansion of
government-welfare programs in a generation. Or if he had listened to the
message that voters sent in the first midterm election by putting Republicans
in charge of Congress—instead of petulantly relying on executive orders, and
using an eraser and whiteout on the Constitution, to shove the Environmental
Protection Agency and other federal agencies deeper into Americans’ lives.

“Over the past seven years America
could have been transformed in an inspiring way if its education system had
been opened up, if its energy policy had been liberated, if the entire approach
to governing had been overhauled. President Obama chose the opposite approach,
favoring a closed education system that fails millions of children and an
energy policy that chains the economy to his green agenda.

“President Obama loves to construct
straw men so he can contrast his heroic self against them. But Donald Trump
needs no characterization; he is capable of being absurd on his own, no outside
help required. Without President Obama, there is no Donald Trump. Mr. Trump
often diagnoses the ills Mr. Obama has caused, but his prescriptions are just
as often wrong. America deserves better.”